Other than my opinion? Well that's kind of hard to do, because we don't really have an all encompassing stat like baseball does which would really take opinion mostly out of it. But based on the statistics we do have, MacDonald has been a replacement level player his whole career. And, in reality, is likely far below replacement level.

I don't dislike Andrew MacDonald by any means. I've met him on many occasions and is a great guy. He is simply an ineffective D-man.



Lol. I'm really not. The market value is the value that a good can be sold on a given market. In this case, the good is his services as a hockey player, and the market is the UFA market. His actual value is what value over a replacement level player he provides. These are common definitions.

For example, I think a full season of Sean Couturier has an actual value that is extraordinarily high. But at the same time, he recieved what I think was market value, as the market was the RFA market



No, I answered a question to a direct question of which player did Holmgren sign to a "really big deal" that should be making to the league minimum. Big difference.
- phatpat44

None of that is the reality of the NHL salary market, nor what MacDonald's market value was at the time he was signed. A player isn't selling anything, he's being hired. You simply haven't made a reasonable argument that MacDonald should be making the league minimum. As I stated previously, Bill wrote a blog on it just the other day. I'll provide a link for you.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=78251

How specifically do you determine what value a player provides over a replacement player?

Which.... I've said. Multiple times. I never expected him to sign for league minimum. That's foolish.
- phatpat44

What's foolish is stating that he should be making league minimum.

Yeah but then we are out of topics until September. It's gonna be torturous. Savor this while it lasts!
- Mononoke

You're forgetting the fun we'll have when we see what Manning's camp is asking for in arbitration.

That's not a fair comparison. Schwartz's deal bought just one year of UFA eligibility. Schenn's would be three.
- phatpat44

Huh? Schwartz signed for five years, two of which are UFA years.

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/jaden-schwartz

Schenn at...

1 yr for 5.5M...not happy, puts team in tighter spot, but workable for the Flyers. Either Schenn blows up, not this last 2 months of the year crap, and gets paid or the Flyers trade him.

2 yrs for 4.3M...Satisfied, reevaluate at end of 2 years, worse case scenario let him walk as a UFA or best case you finally get a player who performs above their pay for once then renegotiate.

Last thing I want to see is Schenn signed for 4-5+ years at 5M+. End up being another situation where the Flyers need to shed dead contract to either resign a young player. Could end up making the Read contract look like a super steal.

None of that is the reality of the NHL salary market, nor what MacDonald's market value was at the time he was signed. A player isn't selling anything, he's being hired. You simply haven't made a reasonable argument that MacDonald should be making the league minimum. As I stated previously, Bill wrote a blog on it just the other day. I'll provide a link for you.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=78251

How specifically do you determine what value a player provides over a replacement player?
- MJL

I've read it. And apparently this isn't getting through to you. I'm not arguing we should be paying MacDonald league minimum right now. That was never my point. I never said we paid more than what he would have made on the open market. I've never said Homer negotiated against himself. I'm making the point that the value he provides as a hockey player is that of a replacement level player. Replacement level players should make no more than league minimum.

And yes, Andrew MacDonald is selling something. He is selling his services as a hockey player. Just like I sell my services as a business analyst. That's what employment is.

How specifically do you determine what value a player provides over a replacement player?
- MJL

There are many people who have worked on this in a more detailed way, but more broadly, when he is on the ice, his team is likely to be outscored than when he is off. And he's one of the worst in the league in that regard.

After that, you can determine how many goals a player is worth vs. a replacement level player. That can then be converted to wins (About 6 goals for a win IIRC). A player should be paid about $3.5M (IIRC again) for a win.

Huh? Schwartz signed for five years, two of which are UFA years.

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/jaden-schwartz
- Feanor

Whoops. My bad, thought it was only one. That one year is still a difference maker, though obviously not as much.

What's foolish is stating that he should be making league minimum.
- MJL

He should be, if he were paid based on his abilities. I mean, this really shouldn't be that controversial. He couldn't even crack last years roster. And even if the cap space excuse is accepted, they didn't call him up after they traded Schenn. If they thought he was good, why wasn't he recalled then? And he's not likely going to make the team this year, even though they'll have plenty of cap space. Even the team that signed him obviously doesn't think he is all that integral.

I think when looking at comparables, Schenn's market is around 5M. I think that is a fair deal.
- MJL

I agree, I think it gets done before the hearing

phatpat44: if you continue this MacDonald conversation, I will personally ban you. That's a warning, mister!

I've read it. And apparently this isn't getting through to you. I'm not arguing we should be paying MacDonald league minimum right now. That was never my point. I never said we paid more than what he would have made on the open market. I've never said Homer negotiated against himself. I'm making the point that the value he provides as a hockey player is that of a replacement level player. Replacement level players should make no more than league minimum.

And yes, Andrew MacDonald is selling something. He is selling his services as a hockey player. Just like I sell my services as a business analyst. That's what employment is.


- phatpat44

No, it's getting through. Either way, you have not made an effective case that MacDonald should've been, or should be paid the league minimum. Bill's blog points out the situation. Nor have you made the point or substantiated in any way that the value he provides is that of a replacement level player. You've just offered an unsupported opinion and a blanket statement. Pro sports is different than employment. There is a contract negotiated and signed under a Collective Bargaining Agreement. You just applied for a job.

There are many people who have worked on this in a more detailed way, but more broadly, when he is on the ice, his team is likely to be outscored than when he is off. And he's one of the worst in the league in that regard.

After that, you can determine how many goals a player is worth vs. a replacement level player. That can then be converted to wins (About 6 goals for a win IIRC). A player should be paid about $3.5M (IIRC again) for a win.
- phatpat44

Please provide the specific calculations for MacDonald, that shows what you state is accurate.

Yeah but then we are out of topics until September. It's gonna be torturous. Savor this while it lasts!
- Mononoke

A big trade is coming

A big trade is coming
- PhillySportsGuy

Manning for a 7th

He's roped in another

Manning for a 7th
- Glak18

Jesus! Not that big

He should be, if he were paid based on his abilities. I mean, this really shouldn't be that controversial. He couldn't even crack last years roster. And even if the cap space excuse is accepted, they didn't call him up after they traded Schenn. If they thought he was good, why wasn't he recalled then? And he's not likely going to make the team this year, even though they'll have plenty of cap space. Even the team that signed him obviously doesn't think he is all that integral.
- phatpat44

His abilities are much higher than a league minimum player. He is capable of providing reliable top 4 minutes, as he has most of his career. Hakstol played MacDonald 22 minutes in game 6 against Washington, which was a playoff elimination game. We can also look at his average icetime per game over his career.

Am I the only one here who can accept the possibility that Schenn's production last year wasn't a fluke? Yes he has bouts of streakiness, but so does fan favorite Simmonds. Is it possible that he becomes an annual 25/35/60 player? If so, I'd welcome him at 5x $5.5M. There is a large contingent on here who treat him like a 40 point 3rd liner who doesn't deserve $4M per. Regression is possible, but I think last year is what we can expect on average.

His abilities are much higher than a league minimum player. He is capable of providing reliable top 4 minutes, as he has most of his career. Hakstol played MacDonald 22 minutes in game 6 against Washington, which was a playoff elimination game. We can also look at his average icetime per game over his career.
- MJL

FOR (frank)S SAKE SHUT UP.

His abilities are much higher than a league minimum player. He is capable of providing reliable top 4 minutes, as he has most of his career. Hakstol played MacDonald 22 minutes in game 6 against Washington, which was a playoff elimination game. We can also look at his average icetime per game over his career.
- MJL

MacDonald talk, I'm lovin' it.

No, it's getting through. Either way, you have not made an effective case that MacDonald should've been, or should be paid the league minimum. Bill's blog points out the situation. Nor have you made the point or substantiated in any way that the value he provides is that of a replacement level player. You've just offered an unsupported opinion and a blanket statement. Pro sports is different than employment. There is a contract negotiated and signed under a Collective Bargaining Agreement. You just applied for a job.





Please provide the specific calculations for MacDonald, that shows what you state is accurate.
- MJL

Well, apparently I'm not allowed to discuss this anymore, so this will be my last post. I didn't think I was breaking any code of conduct here, but whatever.

My case is that he's replacement level. To evidence that, I've talked about how his play is likely to lead to far more goals against than goals for. Here is a list from @DTMaboutheart on twitter whenre he estimated a players impact on their teams goals based on various factors: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cm9AbINXYAAIUS_.jpg

War on ice is down, so I can't show you his specific numbers, but he was below replacement level there. Though, I don't expect you to take my word for it.

There is not one thing in Bill's blog that I disagree with. As I've stated.

Well, apparently I'm not allowed to discuss this anymore, so this will be my last post. I didn't think I was breaking any code of conduct here, but whatever.

My case is that he's replacement level. To evidence that, I've talked about how his play is likely to lead to far more goals against than goals for. Here is a list from @DTMaboutheart on twitter whenre he estimated a players impact on their teams goals based on various factors: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cm9AbINXYAAIUS_.jpg

War on ice is down, so I can't show you his specific numbers, but he was below replacement level there. Though, I don't expect you to take my word for it.

There is not one thing in Bill's blog that I disagree with. As I've stated.
- phatpat44

Andrew MacDonald is the new Randy Jones. Guy is so good they just can't risk playing him in the NHL.

Well, apparently I'm not allowed to discuss this anymore, so this will be my last post. I didn't think I was breaking any code of conduct here, but whatever.
- phatpat44

It's the #1 rule among regulars actually. Thank you for your understanding.

A big trade is coming
- PhillySportsGuy

Is it a 4th in this year's draft for a 4th in next year's draft?

It's the #1 rule among regulars actually. Thank you for your understanding.
- Mononoke

I must of missed that meeting. Must be like the Leafs unwritten rule of not talking about winning or lack thereof.

Well, apparently I'm not allowed to discuss this anymore, so this will be my last post. I didn't think I was breaking any code of conduct here, but whatever.

My case is that he's replacement level. To evidence that, I've talked about how his play is likely to lead to far more goals against than goals for. Here is a list from @DTMaboutheart on twitter whenre he estimated a players impact on their teams goals based on various factors: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cm9AbINXYAAIUS_.jpg

War on ice is down, so I can't show you his specific numbers, but he was below replacement level there. Though, I don't expect you to take my word for it.

There is not one thing in Bill's blog that I disagree with. As I've stated.
- phatpat44

You're certainly allowed to discuss it. I think we would both agree that he's not a 5M a year player. The issue is he's also not a league minimum player.